Traduza o texto abaixo:
''Literary visions of post--apocalyptic worlds in the works of Mary Shelley, Margaret Atwood and Maggie Gee.''
The Age of the Anthropocene, during which humans have become the predominant force shaping our planet, has affected the world to a degree that was unthinkable at the start of the period, roughly, the 18th century. The industrial age transformed the Earth to a degree unimaginable by the innovators who laid the brickwork for the new system that would shape the centuries to come. In the pre-industrial period, the majority of world population lived in rural areas. They would warm themselves with wood, drink the milk from cows, or eat the vegetables they would grow themselves. Everything they ate was pure, no fertilizers were used. They breathed the pure air, now very difficult to find even on mountaintops. How, then, did we manage to destroy nature in such a relatively short time to a point where we are now constantly haunted by a sense of impending doom? A major factor that is contributing to the speedy demise of our ecosystem is global warming, which is affecting the entire planet, and hence the animals, plants, and all vegetation. Is there anything we can do to stop this downward spiral into destruction or at least slow its progress?
Humans have always tried to alter ecosystems and dominate nature in order to meet their needs. This effort certainly gained a new momentum during the industrial age with more advanced machinery. An important consequence of industrialization was urbanization whereby there was a drastic increase in the population of big cities. The consequent destruction of the countryside and the concentration of large numbers of people in cities led to deeply transformative and irreversible changes in society. As Vince (2014, p. 11) points out, cities are “artificial constructs of densely packed – purpose-built living spaces, which act as giant factories consuming the planet’s plants, animals, water, rocks, mineral resources”. As Vince (2014, p. 6) further observes, “today we have the capacity to change plant life. We have transcended natural cycles, altered the physical, chemical, and biological processes of the planets. We can create new life in the test tube, bring extinct species back from the dead, grow new body parts from cells or build mechanical replacements”. As Vince suggests, humans have certainly come to exercise powers that would have seemed magical only a century ago. Yet with power comes responsibility and it is at this point that humans are tragically failing at the cost of not only the planet, but also themselves. It is admittedly very difficult to predict how the world will be a thousand years from now. Ultimately, we just cannot know with certainty how rapidly the changes will take place or what consequences they will have. According to Roy Scranton, we can adapt to the new world of the Anthropocene if we learn to die as an individual and to die as a civilization. As Scranton (2015, p. 27) aptly points out, “to die as an individual means to let go of our predispositions and fear. Learning to die as a civilization means letting go of our particular way of life and its ideas of identity, freedom, success and progress”. Thus, the greatest challenge we are facing seems to be a philosophical one: “understanding that this civilization is dead” (SCRANTON, 2015, p. 15). As Scranton suggests, the human species has to adapt to changing circumstances and transform on a fundamental level in order to survive, perhaps even thrive, in the era of the Anthropocene. This change on the individual and collective levels should also be accompanied by the subversion of habitual forms of thinking and acting, as well as a wider questioning of what civilization means. Without a complete overhaul of anthropocentric thinking that informs especially western civilization with its progressive ethos, an eco-friendlier future that is based on respect for all non-human life forms does not seem possible.
''Literary visions of post--apocalyptic worlds in the works of Mary Shelley, Margaret Atwood and Maggie Gee.''
The Age of the Anthropocene, during which humans have become the predominant force shaping our planet, has affected the world to a degree that was unthinkable at the start of the period, roughly, the 18th century. The industrial age transformed the Earth to a degree unimaginable by the innovators who laid the brickwork for the new system that would shape the centuries to come. In the pre-industrial period, the majority of world population lived in rural areas. They would warm themselves with wood, drink the milk from cows, or eat the vegetables they would grow themselves. Everything they ate was pure, no fertilizers were used. They breathed the pure air, now very difficult to find even on mountaintops. How, then, did we manage to destroy nature in such a relatively short time to a point where we are now constantly haunted by a sense of impending doom? A major factor that is contributing to the speedy demise of our ecosystem is global warming, which is affecting the entire planet, and hence the animals, plants, and all vegetation. Is there anything we can do to stop this downward spiral into destruction or at least slow its progress?
Humans have always tried to alter ecosystems and dominate nature in order to meet their needs. This effort certainly gained a new momentum during the industrial age with more advanced machinery. An important consequence of industrialization was urbanization whereby there was a drastic increase in the population of big cities. The consequent destruction of the countryside and the concentration of large numbers of people in cities led to deeply transformative and irreversible changes in society. As Vince (2014, p. 11) points out, cities are “artificial constructs of densely packed – purpose-built living spaces, which act as giant factories consuming the planet’s plants, animals, water, rocks, mineral resources”. As Vince (2014, p. 6) further observes, “today we have the capacity to change plant life. We have transcended natural cycles, altered the physical, chemical, and biological processes of the planets. We can create new life in the test tube, bring extinct species back from the dead, grow new body parts from cells or build mechanical replacements”. As Vince suggests, humans have certainly come to exercise powers that would have seemed magical only a century ago. Yet with power comes responsibility and it is at this point that humans are tragically failing at the cost of not only the planet, but also themselves. It is admittedly very difficult to predict how the world will be a thousand years from now. Ultimately, we just cannot know with certainty how rapidly the changes will take place or what consequences they will have. According to Roy Scranton, we can adapt to the new world of the Anthropocene if we learn to die as an individual and to die as a civilization. As Scranton (2015, p. 27) aptly points out, “to die as an individual means to let go of our predispositions and fear. Learning to die as a civilization means letting go of our particular way of life and its ideas of identity, freedom, success and progress”. Thus, the greatest challenge we are facing seems to be a philosophical one: “understanding that this civilization is dead” (SCRANTON, 2015, p. 15). As Scranton suggests, the human species has to adapt to changing circumstances and transform on a fundamental level in order to survive, perhaps even thrive, in the era of the Anthropocene. This change on the individual and collective levels should also be accompanied by the subversion of habitual forms of thinking and acting, as well as a wider questioning of what civilization means. Without a complete overhaul of anthropocentric thinking that informs especially western civilization with its progressive ethos, an eco-friendlier future that is based on respect for all non-human life forms does not seem possible.
Lista de comentários
"Visões literárias de mundos pós-apocalípticos nas obras de Mary Shelley, Margaret Atwood e Maggie Gee".
A Era do Antropoceno, durante a qual os seres humanos se tornaram a força predominante que moldou o nosso planeta, afectou o mundo a um grau que era impensável no início do período, aproximadamente, do século XVIII. A era industrial transformou a Terra a um grau inimaginável pelos inovadores que colocaram os tijolos para o novo sistema que iria moldar os séculos vindouros. No período pré-industrial, a maioria da população mundial vivia em zonas rurais. Aqueciam-se com lenha, bebiam o leite das vacas, ou comiam os legumes que eles próprios cultivavam. Tudo o que comiam era puro, não eram utilizados fertilizantes. Respiravam o ar puro, agora muito difícil de encontrar, mesmo nos cumes das montanhas. Como é que, então, conseguimos destruir a natureza em tão pouco tempo, a ponto de sermos agora constantemente assombrados por uma sensação de desgraça iminente? Um factor importante que está a contribuir para a rápida extinção do nosso ecossistema é o aquecimento global, que está a afectar todo o planeta e, consequentemente, os animais, as plantas, e toda a vegetação. Haverá algo que possamos fazer para travar esta espiral descendente até à destruição ou, pelo menos, abrandar o seu progresso?
Os seres humanos sempre tentaram alterar os ecossistemas e dominar a natureza a fim de satisfazer as suas necessidades. Este esforço ganhou certamente um novo impulso durante a era industrial com maquinaria mais avançada. Uma consequência importante da industrialização foi a urbanização, onde se verificou um aumento drástico da população das grandes cidades. A consequente destruição do campo e a concentração de grande número de pessoas nas cidades levou a mudanças profundamente transformadoras e irreversíveis na sociedade. Como assinala Vince (2014, p. 11), as cidades são "construções artificiais de espaços de vida densamente povoados - construídos propositadamente, que funcionam como fábricas gigantescas consumindo as plantas, animais, água, rochas, recursos minerais do planeta". Como Vince (2014, p. 6) observa ainda, "hoje temos a capacidade de mudar a vida vegetal. Transcendemos os ciclos naturais, alterámos os processos físicos, químicos, e biológicos dos planetas. Podemos criar nova vida no tubo de ensaio, trazer de volta espécies extintas dos mortos, fazer crescer novas partes do corpo a partir de células ou construir substituições mecânicas". Como Vince sugere, os seres humanos certamente vieram a exercer poderes que teriam parecido mágicos apenas há um século atrás. No entanto, com o poder vem a responsabilidade e é neste ponto que os humanos estão tragicamente a falhar à custa não só do planeta, mas também de si próprios. É reconhecidamente muito difícil prever como será o mundo daqui a mil anos. Em última análise, simplesmente não podemos saber com certeza a rapidez com que as mudanças ocorrerão ou que consequências terão. De acordo com Roy Scranton, podemos adaptar-nos ao novo mundo do Antropoceno se aprendermos a morrer como indivíduo e a morrer como civilização. Tal como Scranton (2015, p. 27) assinala apropriadamente, "morrer como indivíduo significa deixar de lado as nossas predisposições e o nosso medo. Aprender a morrer como civilização significa abandonar o nosso modo de vida particular e as suas ideias de identidade, liberdade, sucesso e progresso". Assim, o maior desafio que enfrentamos parece ser um desafio filosófico: "compreender que esta civilização está morta" (SCRANTON, 2015, p. 15). Como Scranton sugere, a espécie humana tem de se adaptar às circunstâncias em mudança e transformar-se a um nível fundamental para sobreviver, talvez até prosperar, na era do Antropoceno. Esta mudança a nível individual e colectivo deve também ser acompanhada pela subversão das formas habituais de pensar e agir, bem como por um questionamento mais amplo do significado da civilização. Sem uma revisão completa do pensamento antropocêntrico que informa especialmente a civilização ocidental com o seu ethos progressivo, um futuro eco-amigável que se baseia no respeito por todas as formas de vida não humanas não parece ser possível.